Is the Magnificent 7 PPV worthy?

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by gasman, Sep 1, 2010.


  1. gasman

    gasman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,159
    4
    May 16, 2009
    With the collapse of the biggest fight on the card, Macklin-Barker, is this 'Magnificent' 7 card PPV status?

    Sexton-Chisora, Cleverly-Murat and Brook-Jennings are arguably the three most competitive fights and along with the other four title fights it is a top night of boxing. But, should we be getting this as part of our sky sports package that we are already paying premium subscription for?

    This content is protected
     
  2. Lazarus

    Lazarus Realist Full Member

    29,937
    1
    Jan 1, 2010
    Yes. Look @ Marquez-Diaz which is what? $50 PPV?

    Mag 7 for £15 is a must for a Boxing fan.
     
  3. loughlan

    loughlan Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,896
    0
    Feb 9, 2010
    Macklin - Barker was the only ppv worthy fight imo.
     
  4. wrimc

    wrimc Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,495
    3
    Oct 16, 2009
    I still think so but its a bit of a blow without Barker Macklin still
    Enzo vs frenkel
    Clev vs Murat
    Sexton vs Chisora
    Brook vs Jennings
    Rhodes vs Konecy

    All of these would be main events in their own right so to have them all at once isnt a bad effort just Macklin Barker would have been the Cherry on top i think everyone has forgotten about all the other fights a little bit.
     
  5. hagman1989

    hagman1989 the boxing site , try it Full Member

    8,284
    1
    Dec 13, 2008
    well i think it is because there all on one night , theres 3 good fights along with seeing the olympians all in one night im afraid it has to be a ppv or it wouldnt make any money

    and to be fair it just about warrents £15
     
  6. Lazarus

    Lazarus Realist Full Member

    29,937
    1
    Jan 1, 2010
    :lol: Wtf? People are voting no just because one of the big fights are off? So you people would pay a PPV just for a Macklin-Barker fight?
     
  7. LP_1985

    LP_1985 JMM beat Pac-Man 3 Times Full Member

    30,096
    1
    Sep 6, 2009
    imo it was pushing PPV status in the first place, dont think it is now
     
  8. loughlan

    loughlan Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,896
    0
    Feb 9, 2010
    Macklin - Barker on it's own is more worthy of ppv than Khan - Salita :deal
     
  9. Lazarus

    Lazarus Realist Full Member

    29,937
    1
    Jan 1, 2010
    No thanks.

    I rather watch:

    Khan - Salita
    Mitchell - Prescott
    The Olympians

    Over Macklin - Barker.
     
  10. antcull

    antcull Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,911
    1
    Apr 19, 2008
    It still has 5 very good 12 round fights and a couple of good prospect fights. Still a great card IMO even without Barker-Macklin.
     
  11. kosaros

    kosaros Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,593
    5
    Jul 21, 2008
    Yes. PPV's normally consist of one-two decent fights per card. This one (at the moment at least) has 6 fights that all look good on paper. Just because there aren't any stand out names or 'world' titles at stake, it doesn't mean this card isn't worthy of PPV status IMO.
     
  12. loughlan

    loughlan Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,896
    0
    Feb 9, 2010
    Of course you would, you'd probably pay £15 to watch Amir trimming his toenails.
     
  13. jpab19

    jpab19 Exploding Muffin Dad Full Member

    15,720
    5
    Jul 8, 2010
    Agreed.

    Five of the other fights are main events in there own right so it's a bit stupid just because one fight falls through saying it's not worth it.
     
  14. Lazarus

    Lazarus Realist Full Member

    29,937
    1
    Jan 1, 2010
    :patsch You sir, are an idiot.
     
  15. Lazarus

    Lazarus Realist Full Member

    29,937
    1
    Jan 1, 2010
    Exactly. The guy above would pay £15 just for Macklin-Barker over the Mag 7 (What's left of it) :lol:.